UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 17.5 Free with a free account
Social Responsibility: What Organizations Owe Society
Principles of Management · Chapter 17: Ethics, Social Responsibility, and SustainabilitySection 17.5 · lesson 115 of 11712 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: CSR in Layers: Corporate Responsibility at Every Level →← Whose Interests Come First? Owners, Stockholders, and StakeholdersNext lesson: CSR in Layers: Corporate Responsibility at Every Level →
In this lesson
What organizations owe society.
- Define CSR and distinguish it from philanthropy
- Describe the 4 domains of CSR
- Explain the arguments for and against CSR at full strength
- Assess a described CSR initiative
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,629 words). Read along, or search it.
Ethics, Social Responsibility, and Sustainability
Social Responsibility
What does an organization owe the society it operates in? That's the question of corporate social responsibility, or CSR. We'll start by defining CSR, and separating it from philanthropy, which is only one of its forms. Then we'll lay out its four domains, and why their ordering is contested. We'll present the arguments for CSR and against it, each at full strength. We'll state the evidence on the business case honestly, without making it sound more settled than it is. We'll look at greenwashing, and at the difference between integrated and peripheral CSR. And we'll finish with four questions for assessing any initiative, and a case where a well-run program missed the point.
Defined and Distinguished
CSR Is More Than Philanthropy
Start by placing CSR next to two ideas it's easily confused with. The first is ethics, and Subchapter seventeen point one already drew that line. Ethics concerns how an organization conducts itself. Social responsibility concerns what it owes beyond that. The second is philanthropy, meaning charitable giving and community contribution. Philanthropy is one form CSR can take. It isn't the whole of what CSR means. That's worth stressing, because the two are easy to treat as synonyms. If CSR only meant giving to good causes, an organization could satisfy it without changing anything it actually does. Treating CSR as philanthropy alone misses a considerably broader set of domains. Those domains come next.
The 4 Domains
Economic, Legal, Ethical, Discretionary
Four domains of CSR are conventionally identified. They're arranged here as a framework, but the ordering itself is contested. Economic responsibility is the obligation to be viable, and to provide employment. On most accounts, it's the most foundational domain. The reason is simple. An organization that fails economically can't sustain any of the others. Legal responsibility is the obligation to comply with the law. Ethical responsibility is the obligation to do what's right, beyond what's strictly required. It connects to the ethical frameworks of Subchapter seventeen point one. Finally, discretionary or philanthropic responsibility is the obligation to contribute beyond all of the first three. Notice the hedge built into that one. It's an obligation, if it's one at all. It's genuinely voluntary activity. Nothing in the other domains' logic obliges an organization to undertake it.
Table 17.5.1
The Domains, Who Sets Them, and Their Critics
Table seventeen point five point one adds three things to each domain. An example, who decides the standard, and the criticism it attracts. Economic responsibility looks like remaining profitable enough to sustain employment. The market, and the organization's own governance, set that standard. The criticism is that it can be invoked to justify neglecting the other three domains entirely. Legal responsibility means complying with applicable regulation, and legislatures and regulatory bodies decide the standard. Its criticism is that it treats the legal floor as though it were a sufficient ethical standard. Ethical responsibility means exceeding the minimum legal requirement out of genuine duty. Who decides that standard? It's contested, among ethical frameworks and social consensus. So the criticism is that the standard itself is genuinely disputed, and hard to pin down. Discretionary responsibility looks like voluntary community investment, beyond any obligation. Only the organization's own choice decides it. And the risk is that it functions as public relations, rather than genuine contribution. Notice that every domain draws a criticism. None of them works as the whole of CSR on its own.
The Case For
5 Arguments for CSR, at Full Strength
Five arguments support CSR, and here they are at full strength. First, dependence. The organization uses public infrastructure and social resources. Think of roads, an educated workforce, and legal and financial systems. It genuinely depends on them, so it owes something in return. Second, externalities. The organization creates costs that others bear. Those costs fall on third parties who never agreed to bear them. Third, its own long-term viability depends on the health of the society it operates in. A struggling society ultimately makes a poor market, and a poor source of capable employees. Fourth, capability. Organizations can address problems efficiently, often more efficiently than alternative institutions could. Fifth, public expectation and the license to operate have changed. A broader range of stakeholders now expects organizations to account for their social effect. That's become a normal condition of doing business.
The Case Against
4 Arguments Against CSR, at Equal Strength
Four arguments oppose CSR, and they deserve equal strength. First, it spends money belonging to others, on purposes they didn't choose. That echoes the shareholder primacy concern, developed in full in Subchapter seventeen point four. Second, it places social decisions with unelected managers. Those managers answer to no broader democratic mandate for the social choices they're making. Third, CSR may be used as a substitute for regulation, or as cover for other conduct. Visible CSR activity can distract attention from genuine problems elsewhere in an organization's operations. Fourth, the measurement of its benefits is weak. That makes it genuinely difficult to verify whether a given activity delivers the social benefit it claims. Keep that last argument in mind. Measurement comes back several times in this section.
The Business Case
What the Evidence Shows, Stated Honestly
Does CSR pay? The evidence on the business case has to be stated honestly, not as more settled than it is. Three findings matter. First, across the available research, the association between social and financial performance is generally positive, and modest. Positive, but modest. Both words matter. Second, causal direction is genuinely hard to establish. Profitable organizations can afford more CSR activity in the first place. So the correlation could run from profitability toward CSR investment. That might be instead of, or in addition to, the direction the business case typically claims. Third, the effect varies substantially by industry, and by the type of activity. So there's no single, uniform business case that applies equally to every organization and every kind of CSR. Anyone who says CSR always pays is claiming more than the evidence shows.
Greenwashing
When Responsibility Is Only Presentation
That brings us to the recurring criticism CSR draws. Greenwashing means presenting an organization as more socially or environmentally responsible than its actual practice supports. It belongs to impression management more broadly, managing how the organization appears, rather than what it does. Here's the principle to hold onto. A CSR claim without measurement is a marketing claim. In substance, it's indistinguishable from ordinary advertising. That holds no matter how genuinely social its language sounds. So the test isn't whether a claim sounds responsible. The test is whether there's a measured outcome behind it. This is where the weak-measurement argument against CSR bites hardest.
Integrated and Peripheral
Where CSR Sits Relative to the Business
One distinction does a lot of work in assessing CSR. Is it integrated with the business, or peripheral to it? Integrated CSR connects directly to what the organization actually does. For instance, a manufacturer investing in the environmental efficiency of its own production process. Peripheral CSR operates separately from the organization's core operations. For instance, funding an unrelated charitable cause, with no connection to what the organization does or how it does it. The argument here is direct. Integrated CSR is both more effective and more defensible. It's more effective because it draws on the organization's actual capability. It's more defensible because it directly addresses effects the organization's own operations produce. Peripheral CSR risks looking disconnected from the organization's genuine operating reality. And sometimes, it actually is disconnected.
Figure 17.5.1
Integration and Measurement Are Independent
Figure seventeen point five point one places four initiatives at Harborline Manufacturing, a fictional firm, on two dimensions. Integration with the business runs along the horizontal axis. Strength of measurement runs up the vertical one. An unrelated charitable donation sits low and to the left. It's peripheral, and unmeasured. A process efficiency investment sits high and to the right. It's in core operations, with tracked outcomes. So far, the two dimensions seem to move together. The other two initiatives show they don't. A supply chain standards program is part of core operations, but it's only weakly measured. An employee volunteering program is peripheral to the business, yet it's well tracked. So integration and measurement are genuinely independent dimensions. An initiative can be well integrated, and still weakly measured. Or it can be peripheral, and still well tracked. That's why assessing an initiative means examining both dimensions, rather than assuming they move together.
Assessing an Initiative
4 Questions for Any CSR Initiative
Put it all together, and any CSR initiative can be assessed against four questions. First, what problem does it address? It should be stated specifically, not vaguely. A vague goal, like helping the community, could mean almost anything. Second, does the organization have a relevant capability to address that problem effectively? Third, what is measured? And does that measurement genuinely track outcome, or only activity? Counting events held is activity. Counting what changed because of them is outcome. Fourth, would the initiative survive disclosure of its full cost and benefit? Imagine its true cost, and its true, measured effect, both made fully public. Would it still look defensible? That's a good question to ask before an initiative launches, not after.
Case Vignette
Funding the Problem the Core Business Creates
Here's a composite case, constructed for instruction. Harborline Manufacturing funded a well-publicized environmental restoration program, in a region near one of its production facilities. Meanwhile, that same facility's operations kept producing the very environmental impact the program was working to offset. And there was no corresponding investment in reducing that impact at its actual source. Now, be fair to the program. It was genuinely well run. Its funding genuinely reached the community it targeted. Measured on its own terms, it delivered real benefit. But a closer look revealed how peripheral the arrangement was. The program addressed a symptom of Harborline's own operations. The organization applied no comparable capability or investment to the operational source of the problem. This was CSR peripheral to the business, rather than integrated with it. A comparable investment in the production process itself would have addressed the actual source of the impact. By this section's own account, that would have been both more effective, and more defensible. Next, Subchapter seventeen point six turns to the levels at which responsibility actually operates, and how it's implemented and measured in practice.
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Social Responsibility: What Organizations Owe Society
Is corporate social responsibility the same as philanthropy?
What are the four domains of corporate social responsibility?
What are the main arguments for and against corporate social responsibility?
Does corporate social responsibility improve financial performance?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →